Seòmar agus comataidhean

We come to the last of our continued petitions today, PE1991, which was also lodged by Gemma Clark. It calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to work with Education Scotland to develop a health-focused and stigma-challenging educational resource on abortion and to make that available to all secondary schools in Scotland.

We last considered the petition on 22 February, when we agreed to write to stakeholder organisations. The Association of Directors of Education in Scotland, the General Teaching Council for Scotland, the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children, COSLA, the Scottish Catholic Education Service and the petitioner have submitted responses, copies which were circulated with our meeting papers.

I draw members’ attention to the responses from COSLA and ADES, which note that materials linked to the ask of the petition are available and that work is already taking place in schools to deal with the issues that it raises. COSLA also states that the curriculum for excellence allows teachers, schools and local authorities to design a curriculum that fits their own context, the result of which is that there is no mechanism whereby all schools can be compelled to use any specific materials. Similarly, the response from the Scottish Catholic Education Service notes the availability of resources and advice for young people, and highlights the fact that schools are not the sole providers of education and that the close partnership between schools and the wider school community serves young people well in ensuring that they have access to qualified expertise relating to health and to social, physical, spiritual and mental wellbeing.

In view of the responses that we have received, do members have any comments or suggestions?

It is a fairly clear direction from the Scottish Government that it is not going to write off that student debt, so are colleagues minded to close the petition?

Members indicated agreement.

Are members inclined to support the proposal?

Members indicated agreement.

Thank you very much, minister.

We most recently considered the petition on 31 May, when we reflected on the evidence that we had taken in April from the petitioner and from Who Cares? Scotland, CELCIS, the Children and Young People’s Commissioner Scotland and The Promise Scotland. That was a striking round-table session, which persuaded the committee of the fundamental decency and drive of Jasmin’s petition.

I think that you have already answered this question but, to open the discussion, will you provide a clear assertion of where the extending of eligibility for continuing care and aftercare through legislation sits in the Government’s priorities?

If Cara Cooper or Sarah Corbett wishes to come in, they should let me know. The minister may also invite them to come in.

I think that I follow what you are saying, minister. Through the listening exercise and the consultation, you are exploring ways in which the priority of extending eligibility for continuing care and aftercare could be realised or delivered. That may or may not be through legislation. Is that where we are at? Do you see there being a role for legislation or do you think that, through the work that you are doing, there might be another route to achieving the outcome?

Maurice Golden has a question, which I think that I have heard two answers to already, so we will see if he can drill down and get the definitive one.

PE1913, which was lodged by Wendy Swain, calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to create a separate department within Social Security Scotland that will fast-track future adult disability payments—ADPs—for people with a cancer diagnosis while they are undergoing treatment.

We last considered the petition on 23 February and agreed to write to Social Security Scotland. The response from the agency reiterates that the Scottish Government provides a person-centred service and does not prioritise a single condition or type of disability above another. The response states that the Scottish Government does not support an additional fast-track procedure specifically for people with cancer and that there is a fast-track process for people with a terminal illness.

In response to questions about processing times, Social Security Scotland said that there are no targets, as no two applications are the same. However, it indicates that the majority of people will receive a decision within four months and that payments are then calculated from the date of the application.

I should have said that the Scottish Government believes that the fast-track process for people with a terminal illness would accommodate a significant number of those people with a cancer diagnosis.

Do colleagues have any suggestions in light of the Scottish Government’s decision not to take action on the aim of the petition?

Obviously, 2023 is fast disappearing and nothing has materialised yet. Are we content to close the petition?

We will hear what NHS Tayside has to say, but we will do that on the presumption that, having heard what it has to say, we might very well seek to have the petitioner or others who have been affected by the condition give evidence to the committee, so that we have that on the record, with everyone able to see what the condition has led to and the difficulties that people have had in finding a way forward. Are colleagues content to proceed on that basis?

Members indicated agreement.

Thank you very much. You came, you asked, you got.